HBziGi 

C82 






Hollinger Corp. 
pH8.5 



GROWTH AND DENSITY OF POPULATION OF 

GREAT CITIES OF OVER ONE MILLION 

INHABITANTS. 

At the annual meeting of the American Association 
for the Advancement of Science, held at Springfield, 
Mass., in 1895, the author presented a paper to Sec- 
tion *T," with a similar title. The present paper gives 
the necessary summary of the former paper, and brings 
the curves and data down generally to the census of 
1900, also corrects any errors in the former paper. 

In 1886 and 18B7, Mr. Rudolph Hering, civil engineer, 
and at that time chairman of a commission for solving 
the problem of water supply and drainage of the city 
of Chicago, compiled some statistics and made a dia- 
gram showing the curve of growth of population of 
several cities in the United States. About the year 1890, 
for the purpose of presenting in a professional report 
on a rapid transit question in Chicago a comparison 
between the several cities shown on Mr. Hering' s dia- 
gram, the writer extended the diagram to a more recent 
date. During 1894 he obtained, by an extended cor- 
respondence, the necessary information, and plotted on 
a new diagram the curves of growth of population of 
several cities of the world numbering over 1,000,000 in- 
habitants at the present time. These curves were ex- 
tended forward, as will be seen by an examination of 
the diagram. Many interesting and instructive features 
were presented by this comparison, and the value of 
the results thus presented graphically were at once ap- 
preciated by an examination of the diagram. 

The density of the population of each city, so far as 
it could be ascertained, was also shown graphically by 
squares of various sizes. 

The information was obtained from official sources 
through the author's correspondents, all of whom kindly 
interested themselves to comply with his requests for 
data, and to whom he is largely indebted for the relia- 
ble character of the figures. 



As each city has its pecuHarities in history, growth, 
density and many other features, it is necessary to take 
up each separately in order to fully understand and 
appreciate the curves on the diagram. 

Before, however, proceeding to the cities separately, 
there should be given the data which form the basis 
for the extension of the curves for the last decade. These 
have all been obtained from official sources and are 
believed to be correct. 

If the diagram is compared with that of 1895, pub- 
lished in Vol. XLIV, page 359 et seq., it will be seen 
that some of the curves for periods previous to 1890 
have been slightly changed. This was done to make 
them conform to the official figures received subsequent 
to the publication of the former paper. 

An attempt has been made to give in each case the 
metropolitan population, regardless of suburban city 
lines or even State lines, as in the case of New York, 
where those populations of New Jersey, which are really 
a part of the metropolitan population of Greater New 
York, are included. 

In the case of Berlin, a personal visit to that city last 
summer convinced the writer that his former basis of 
population was misleading, and that there should be 
a "Greater Berlin" to include the twelve separate cities 
or districts, which, while an integral part of the metro- 
politan population, have separate municipal govern- 
ments. There are twelve of those municipalities which 
are not included in the population of Berlin, but are 
included in Greater Berlin. The admirable street-car 
system has made the population practically a unit. 

The data for the diagram for plotting the curves of 
the last decade are as per the following table, to which 
has been appended, as a matter of interest, the popula- 
tions of Germany and the United States, by which it will 
be seen that the former is growing at a rate of about 
16 per cent, per decade and the latter 20 per cent. 

DATA FOR DIAGRAM. 

London 1900 4,589,129 

Greater London 1900 6,652,145 

Paris (Greater) 1896 3,308,007 

1901 3,599,991 

St. Petersburg ; 1890 954,400 

1897 1,132,677 



Berlin 1893 1,640 

1895 1,678 

1898 1,801 
1900 1,884 

Greater Berlin 1880 1,245 

1890 1,848 

1895 2,112 

1900 2,512 

Vienna 1894 1,480 

1899 1,639 
Philadelphia ....1890 1,105 

1900 1,369 
New York (Manhattan : 

Borough) 1890 lv441 

1900 .l;850 

Greater New York 1890 2,799 

1900 3,'833 

Greater Chicago 1890 ' 1,191 

1900 1^838 

GERMANY < 1880 45,234 

1890 49,428 

1895 52,279 

1900 56,345 

UNITED STATES 1880 50,155 

1890 62,622 

1900 76,303 



994 
912 
261 
157 
279 
018 
366 
523 
572 
811 
277 
632 

216 
093 
242 
999 
922 
735 
061 
470 
901 
014 
783 
250 
387 



LONDON. 

For the information of those who are not familiar 
with the peculiar geographical conditions of the popula- 
tion, the following data need to be given in order to 
have a full understanding of the subject : 

Area in 
London within Various Bounparies. . statute acres. 

Within the registrar-general's tables of mor- 
tality 74,672 

Within the limits of the county of London 75,442 

London school-board .district ..:. 75,442 

City of London, within the municipal and par- 
liamentary limits 671 

Central criminal court district .-..; 269,140 

Metropolitan parliamentary boroughs (exclu- 
sive of the city of London) 74,771 

Same (including the city of London) 85,442 

Metropolitan police district (not inckiding citj^ 

of London) 442,750 

Metropolitan and city police districts 443,421 



6 

The metropolitan police district extends over an area, 
with a radius of fifteen miles from Charing Cross, 688.31 
square miles, exclusive of the "city of London." 

The population used in the curve of growth is that 
included in the registrar-general's area, or "Registration 
London," which embraces what is called "Water Lon- 
don," as it is the 620 square miles of area supplied by 
the eight metropolitan water cempanies. 

It is almost impossible in the case of London, as 
well as that of other cities, to define the area of the 
metropolitan population, that is, the population of the 
city itself and of the suburban districts which contain 
the population doing business in the city. The limits of 
London could be extended far beyond those of the reg- 
istrar-general, and with each extension a much different 
population would be found to exist. To compare, per- 
haps, more properly with the other cities and cover the 
metropolitan area, it should be stated that the popu- 
lation supplied by the London water companies in 1892 
was estimated to be 5,490,780, and this population was 
plotted on the author's diagram of 1895. In 1891 the 
population of "Greater London" (London and the "outer 
ring") was 5,633,806. 

Registration London is (1900) 4,589,129 

Greater London " " 6,652,145 

As to the density of population, that of the White 
Chapel district is taken as a maximum, being, on the 
357 acres included, at the rate of 132,000 per square mile 
in 1891. The average in the whole of London is 37,000. 
per square mile. 

In the way of further explanations it whould be 
stated that "Greater London" is the area included within 
the metropolitan and city police districts, and includes 
all parishes wholly situate within a circle of fifteen miles' 
radius from Charing Cross, and all parishes of which 
any part is included within a circle of twelve miles' radius 
from the- same center. Its total area is 701 square 
miles, and its population in 1891 was 5,633,332. (See 
"London Water Supply," a paper presented to the So- 
ciety of Arts, April 19, 1899, by Walter Hunter, Esq., 
Member Inst. C. E.) 

The present ratio of increase per decade is as 
follows : 

Greater London 20 per cent. 

London 8.6 per cent. 



GREATER NEW YORK. 

The curve of growth of this great city of the United 
States is interesting, first, by its comparison with its 
neighbor, Philadelphia. The curves show that they kept 
pace with each other very closely from the year 1700 to 
1830, when population in New York began to grow 
with rapid strides and has continued to do so up to 
the present time, the ratio of increase being greater than 
that of any other large city in the world except Chicago. 
The density of the tenth ward, which is on the east 
side of the city, between the Brooklyn Bridge and Grand 
Street, is greatest of any in the world, with the exception 
perhaps of a certain district in the city of Prague, and it 
may be said advisedly that Sanitary District A of the 
eleventh ward has the greatest density of any corre- 
sponding area of the world, and twice that of Prague in 
1893. It comprises about 320 acres, the density in 1890 
ranged from 600 to 1,000 inhabitants per acre, or an 
average of about 512,000 per square mile, the greatest 
density being 640,000 per square mile. The total popu- 
lation in 1900 was 3,833,999. The present ratio of 
increase per decade is 37 per cent. 

PARIS. 

In 1860 the area of Paris was considerably extended 
by taking in the suburban communes, which increased 
the population at that time nearly half a million. The 
density of the population is shown, first, by taking out 
the squares, or greens and woods, making the average 
in 1890 on this basis 121,300 per square mile and the 
area 22.4 square miles. The average of the entire city, 
including the squares, etc., was 79,500 per square mile, 
covering thirty-one square miles. The curve of growth of 
Paris brings out several interesting and important 
historical points. For instance, the cit^^, as is well known, 
suffered greatly during the latter part of the reign of Louis 
XVI. and during the Reign of Terror, from 1774 to 1799, 
during which period the population actually decreased. 
On the other hand, under the reign of Louis XIV. — 1643 
to 1715, and that of Louis XV., 1715 to 1754— it greatly 
prospered, and the growth in the latter period is shown 
on the curve as having a regular increase. From 1852 
to 1870 the Emperor Louis Napoleon did much for 
Paris, and its growth was very rapid and comparatively 
uniform. The effect upon the city by the Franco-Prus- 
sian war and the Communes is shown plainly on the 



10 

curve of growth. The population of Greater Paris in 
1901 was 3,599,991, New York having outstripped it. 
The present ratio of increase per decade is 18 per cent. 

CHICAGO. 

This city, on account of its large area in comparison 
with the population, had, in 1894, an average of only 
8,430 inhabitants to the square mile, its area being 186 
square miles. In arriving at the population for 1894, 
it was necessary to use considerable judgment in de- 
ciding which census should be employed. There had 
been estimates made of over 2,000,000, but to be con- 
servative the school census of 1894 was used, making 
the population, including the whole of Cook County, 
1,692,727. In ascertaining the ratio of increase, different 
results are obtained by using different methods of esti- 
mating the population, whether by the United States 
census or by that of the city. The increase from 1880 
to 1890 by the United States census was 118 per cent. 
Comparing the United States census of 1890 with the 
school census of 1890 the ratio of increase per decade 
was 106 per cent. If, again, we compare the school 
census of 1884 with the school census of 1894 we have 
an increase of 150 per cent, per decade. 

The U. S. census of 1900 revealed the fact that all 
the approximate figures made in 1894 from various 
censuses were entirely too large. The population in 1900 
was 1,838,735, and by the writer's figures 1,692,727, 
in 1894, both embracing the whole of Cook County, 
which is assumed to be the metropolitan popiilation. 
The ratio of increase per decade of 106.5 per cent, was 
excessive and led to an erroneous prediction of popula- 
tion in the future. 

The actual rate of growth per decade based on the 
U. S. census of 1890 and that of 1900 is only 54 per 
cent. However, there were important financial condi- 
tions affecting the industrial and social status of the 
city, which led to a decrease in the rate of increase be- 
tween 1895 and 1900. The financial crash of 1893, when 
the Columbia Bank and other financial institutions and 
companies and private individuals went to the wall, had 
much to do in arresting the growth of the city. The 
results of this local as well as national and interna- 
tional financial depression did not make itself felt in the 
population until about 1897 and 1898. 

Another cause had much to do with the decreased 
rate of growth, and that was the industrial reaction 



11 

after the World's Fair in 1893. In that year, and for 
two years previous, while the extensive Exposition prepa- 
rations were going on, there was an extraordinary influx 
of population which was compelled to seek other parts of 
the country at the close of the great fair. 

The population in 1900 by the U. S. census was 
1,838,735. 

The rate of growth based on the census of 1890 and 
1900 is 54 per cent. 

BpRLIN. 

The census of this city is taken every year and has 
been so taken since the year 1720. Consequently, the 
curve of growth is an entirely different one from that 
of almost any other city, as the points in drawing the 
curve are much nearer together on the diagram. As in 
the city of Paris diagram, so in that of Berlin, the effects 
of political and military disturbance in the kingdom are 
plainly seen. The seven years' war from 1756 to 1763 
caused a decrease in the population. From 1800 to 
1810, an entire decade, there is again a steady decrease, 
and it was during this period that the battles of Hohen- 
linden, Jena, Auerstadt, Eylau and Friedland were fought 
with the French. By the peace of Tilsit at the end of 
this period, Prussia lost one-half of her possessions and 
kept the other half under very hard conditions. In 
1871 the King of Prussia was proclaimed Emperor of 
Germany, and Berlin became the seat of the empire. 
From that time the growth has been very rapid, the 
ratio of increase from 1883 to 1893, the period of 
maximum increase, being 37 per cent. 

In density Berlin stands next to Paris, the maximum 
density in 1893 being 92,600 per square mile and the 
average density 67,612, with an area of 24.3 square miles. 

Supplementing the explanations already given in 
regard to Berlin, the population in 1890 of Berlin proper 
was 1,884,157, and of Greater Berlin, including the 
twelve districts above mentioned, 2,512,525. And the 
present rate of increase is respectively 12 per cent, and 
19 per cent. 

The difference — Berlin and Greater Berlin — is not as 
great as that between London and Greater London, 
but still both show the effect of urban and interurban 
rapid transit by underground, overground and surface 
lines. 

It is safe to predict that the further extensions of 
those lines and the quickening of the speed will make 



n 

the growth of the Greater City in both cases much more 
rapid in the future than at present. The author is of 
the opinion that the improvements and extensions con- 
templated in London by American railway projectors 
and capitalists will effect a great change in the methods 
of growth of population. 

■ VIENNA. 

The accessible records of population of this city are 
very incomplete and the curve of population is made 
from comparatively few dates. The authorities diifer 
considerably as to the population. The fact that the 
garrison of the city is constantly changing vitiates the 
the census records. 

It is impracticable to secure census returns later 
than 1899. The population was then 1,617,160, to 
which should be added a permanent garrison of 22,651 
soldiers, making a total of 1,639,811. The population 
in 1894 on the same basis was 1,480,572. The rate 
of increase is 11 per cent. 

PHILADELPHIA. 

There is nothing particularly striking in regard to 
the curve of this citj^ It shows a gradual growth and 
very regular. The density of population is verA^ nearly 
like that of Chicago, being 8,091 per square mile on an 
area of 129 square miles. The population, which in- 
cludes Camden, N. J., which is really a part of the metro- 
politan population of Philadelphia, is 1,369,632. The 
rate of increase is 23 per cent. 

ST. PETERSBURG. 

The eifect of the founder, Peter the Great, upon the 
inception of this city and its growth during two decades 
is plainly seen at the origin of the curve. In fact, it is 
generally known that, when it was founded in 1703, 
compulsory means were employed b3^ him to increase 
the population to 100,000. Under Elizabeth, from 1741 
to 1762, it reached 150,000, and under Catherine II., 
1762 to 1796, it reached nearly 300,000. One disturbing 
feature exists in the census estimates, in that the city has a 
much larger population in the winter than in the summer, 
as is well known. The curve of growth includes this 
■ winter- population and ' also the immediate suburbs, the 
object being to arrive at the metropolitan population. 



13 

In reference to the density of population, the most thickly 
settled ward has 50,000 inhabitants, or at the rate of 
113,636 per square mile, and the most thicklj^ settled 
district in that ward had a population of 227,276 per 
square mile in 1894. The average for the whole city on 
an area of 350 square miles was at the rate of 28,260 
per square mile. The population in 1897, the latest 
year available, was 1,132,677. In 1890 it was 954,400. 
The rate of increase is 15^^ per cent, per decade. 

Recapitulating the statement in regard to ratio of 
increase at present in the several cities above noted, the 
following summary is given : 

Present ratio of increase, London 8.6 

Greater London 20.0 

Greater New York.... 37.0 

Manhattan Borough 29.0 

" " Paris (Greater) ....18.0 

Chicago ...: 54.0 

Berlin 12.0 

" " Greater Berlin 19.0 

Philadelphia .23.0 

" " St. Petersburg 15.5 

" " Vienna 11.0 

Although the diagram exhibits more effectively the 
den.sity of population, the following figures will show the 
basis on which the graphical squares are drawn : 

NEW YORK, maximum density, 630,740 per sciuare mile ^ 

on 3.6 acres. 
Average maximum density, 480,000 per square mile 

on 320 acres. 
Average density New York City proper, 40,000 per 

square mile on 37 square miles. 

LONDON, maximum density, 132,000 per scjuare mile on 
357 acres. 
Average density (Registration London) 37,000 per 
square mile on 117 square miles. 

PARIS, average density, 79,300 per square mile on 31 
square miles. 

ST. PETERSBURG, maximum density, 227,276 per 

square mile. 
Maximum density ward, 113,636 per square mile.: 
Average density, 28,260 per square mile on 35 square 

miles. 



14 

BERLIN, maximtim density, 92,600 per square mile. 
Average density, 67,612 per square mile; area 23.4 
square miles. 

PHILADELPHIA, average density, 8,091 per square 
mile; area 129 square miles. 

CHICAGO, average density, 8,430 per square mile; area 
186 square miles. 

As the number of houses and the number of inhabi- 
tants per house have much to do with the density of 
population, the following items are of considerable in- 
terest : New York, in 1894, had 15,000 houses averag- 
ing eighteen residents. London, 600,000 houses averag- 
ing seven residents; at the beginning «f this century it 
had only 130,000 houses. Paris had 90,000 houses; 
at the close of the Franco- Prussian war it had 70,000, 
and at the close of the Napoleonic wars it had only 
23,000. The average number of residents in a Paris 
house was twenty-five, 40 per cent, greater than in New 
York. The most of the public and office buildings in 
Paris are utilized for residence purposes, whereas in New 
York most of the buildings in the downtown district are 
used entirely for business purposes. Taking a square 
mile of territory between Wall and Spruce streets and 
between Broadway and the East River there was,, at 
an election a few years ago, only 430 voters, representing 
a total population of about 1 , 750. The unoccupied spaces 
in parks, gardens and lawns in Philadelphia is seen from 
the fact that, while its population was only about 
1,000,000 in 1890, it had 187,000 houses and an aver- 
age density of 8,091 per square mile. 

The facts on the diagram offer material for interesting 
study ; such as the influence of national life upon urban 
growth, especially upon that of these principal cities; 
the serious effect of war upon the growth of cities ; the 
remarkable change going on in these countries by which 
the great cities are pushing upward their curves of 
growth; and, what is perhaps of greater interest still, 
the quite close approximation that it is possible to make 
of the time when some of the curves will' intersect and 
the rank in population be changed, some outstripping 
others and some falling behind their more prosperous 
competitors. 

An approximate estimate may at least be hazarded. 



15 

predicting the population of the cities under considera- 
tion at the end of future decades. 

Certain important possible changes in conditions 
need, however, to be considered in forecasting such re- 
sults, among which are, first, the changes which new 
methods of transportation may bring about, either tak- 
ing people more quickly and cheaply into cities, or out 
of them into more distant districts now open areas or 
sparsely settled country. Second, the congesting or 
overcrowding of city areas making tliem too dense for 
comfort or health. These two conditions are already 
producing changes of magnitude in population. London 
is an instance of these effects or of some others possi- 
bly; several of the central districts, instead of showing 
an increase, showed actual decrease in the last two cen- 
sus epochs. 

It is difficult to predict now what change will take 
place in New York during the succeeding decades by the 
contemplated transportation changes, such as the open- 
ing of the new bridges over the East River, the probable 
completion of the old Hudson River Tunnel, the con- 
struction of the Rapid Transit Subway lines, the electri- 
fying of the Manhattan Elevated and the extension of 
electric lines into the suburbs, and particularly by the 
construction of the Pennsylvania Railway's proposed 
tunnel under the rivers and New York, connecting New 
Jersey and Long Island with the central district of New 
York City, and additional facilities for handling pas- 
sengers at the Grand Central Depot and transferring 
them to the Subway. 

In 1895 the author was in some cases led astray by 
the erroneous population estimates, as already stated, 
and his prediction for 1900 based on them and the ratio 
of increase which showed was far from correct. The 
causes above stated, which arrested the growth of Chi- 
cago, had not shown their influence upon population in 
1895. 

Berlin may be expected to grow quite rapidly for at 
least two decades more. As the seat of a comparatively 
new empire, it is still young, strong, vigorous and am- 
bitious. 

And in addition to all other reasons for the contin- 
uance in rapid growth of the above mentioned cities, 
there must be taken into account that of the modern 
tendency to gravitate to great centers of population, 
which modern methods of transportation have ac- 
celerated. 

Even with the above problematic conditions disturb- 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



JUN 17 1903 




16 013 739 226 4 



ing the future, there is sufficient ground on which to 
rest a prediction of population, which the author had the 
temerity to make first in 1895. 

- He presents this table again, with the actual popula- 
tion as given above, placed in juxtaposition to his pre- 
dicted population : 

Esiimated Actual Estimated Estimated 

for lyoO. 19U0. for ll»lO. for 1920. 

Greater London ' 6,496,000 6,652,145 7,490,400 8,516,256 

London 4,599,800 4,589,129 4,967,784 5,315,528 

New York (Greater) .. 3,900,000 3,833,999 4,953,000 6,191,250 

Paris 2,697,300 1 2,660,559 2,967,030 3,234,063 

Greater Paris 13,599,991 4,139,990 4,759,589 

Berlin 2,101,400 1,884,157 2,731,820 3,496,729 

Greater Berlin 2,512,523 2,914,517 3,322,549 

*Greater Chicago 2,400,000 1,838,735 2,574,-229 3,475,209 

Philadelphia 1,414,500 1,369,632 1,697,400 2,002,932 

St. Petersburg 1,185,600^1,132,677 1,339,728 1,500,495 

*Note. — Chicago. The erroneous estimates of population in 1894 
require revision of prediction. 

t Population 1901. 

:j: Actual population 1897. 

The author has endeavored, under difficult conditions 
and by considerable correspondence, to obtain from 
time to time the population and other features of the 
growth of cities of over one million population, hoping 
that the figures would be of use in solving some of the 
important transportation, economic and social problems 
of these great masses of humanity. 

It will be necessary, in 1910, to increase not only the 
population of cities now discussed, but add several to the 
list; no doubt one or two cities of Great Britain and 
some in this country, like Boston, and also Buenos Aires, 
which expects a population of over a million in 1906 
or 1907. 



ELMER L. CORTHELL, vSc. D. 



1 Nassau Street, New York, 
December, 1902. 



